Туркмены, узбеки, таджики и ягнобцы. Генетическая история юга Центральной Азии. Тюрки и индоиранцы
Central Asia is a large region stretching from the Caspian Sea in the west to Lake Baikal in the east, covering Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and northern Afghanistan. The region has been at the crossroads of migration routes ever since modern humans left Africa, resulting in a long-term human presence, rich history, and high cultural diversity. For example, the agricultural and pastoral communities that have existed since the time of the Jeytun culture of 6000 BC. e., were replaced by agricultural in the Eneolithic era (4800-3000 BC), with villagers leading an economy associated with irrigated agriculture. In the Middle Bronze Age in the south of
Central Asia, the civilization of the Bactria-Margiana archaeological complex flourished with characteristic proto-urban settlements, powerful irrigation technologies and a pronounced social hierarchy. Around 3000 BC, a nomadic lifestyle spread in northern Central Asia, which became important in the region during the Late Bronze Age (2400–2000 BC). Previously, it was shown that the populations of the Bactria-Margiana archaeological complex are mainly a mixture of Iranian (~60–65%) and Anatolian (~20–25%) farmers. However, some Bactrians had an increased proportion of a steppe component similar to that of the Yamnaya culture, suggesting that a steppe origin began to appear in Central Asia around 2100 BC. e. Earlier it was reported that in three sites of the Bactria-Margiana archaeological complex in 2100-1700. BC e. people were identified with a pedigree associated with the pastoralists of the western steppe of the Middle and Late Bronze Age, who already had a third of an admixture from European farmers. What speaks of the reverse flow of genes from west to east and further south.
At the end of the Bronze Age, approximately from 1800 BC, the Oxus civilization at its final stage underwent important transformations: ⦁ remaining in the same tradition, the material culture became impoverished, some ceramic forms and artifacts disappeared; ⦁ individual habitats were abandoned, monumental architecture disappeared, the level of technological development seemed to have declined; ⦁ foreign trade, which flourished during the previous peak phase, has slowed down significantly or even stopped, with the exception of contacts with the steppes of northern Central Asia; ⦁ burial customs changed with the advent of new ways of burial, until the complete disappearance of burials in the early Iron Age, which may be due to ideological evolution. Between 1800 and 1500 B.C. e. the Andronovo culture predominated, until the emergence of the Yaz culture of the early Iron Age, which is notable for the shift in material culture and burial practices. And later, Central Asia was the scene of the conquests of the Achaemenids, Greco-Bactrians, Partho-Sasanians and Arabs, moving east, as well as moving west of various Asian peoples such as the Huns, Xiongnu and Mongols, before becoming a trading center along the Great Silk Road, especially during the Sassanid Empire and after the Islamic conquest. The currently complex demographic history of Central Asia has resulted in complex genetic diversity, with the contemporary population of Central Asia divided into two culturally distinct groups : genetic similarity with the population of East Asia and Siberia.
⦁ And the second group, formed by Tajiks and Yaghnobis, who live in the southern part of Central Asia, speak Indo-Iranian languages, are engaged in agriculture, lead a sedentary lifestyle and are genetically more similar to modern populations of Western Eurasia and Iranians. Moreover, the Yaghnobis are known to have been in genetic isolation for a long time without any sign of recent admixture. Modern DNA studies have shown that Indo-Iranian populations were present in Central Asia before the Turkic-Mongolian groups, possibly as early as Neolithic times. And the Turkic-Mongolian group arose later as a result of the mixing of local Indo-Iranians with South Siberian or Mongolian groups with a high proportion of East Asian origin (about 60%). At the same time, the Turkmen, genetically separated from the Turko-Mongolian group, occupying an intermediate position with the Indo-Iranian group, which suggests a recent shift in language and culture, possibly as a result of language replacement, mainly due to the dominance of the elites.
By the way, it is worth considering that some modern Turkic-speaking populations are much closer to the ancient Indo-Iranian populations than to the proto-Turks. But this does not make these ancient Indo-Iranian populations Turkic, by definition it is impossible. Paleogenetic studies have confirmed that over the past 10 thousand years, numerous migration waves and mixing events have occurred in Eurasia, in which steppe populations have played an important role. At the same time, the processes in Europe
were better studied than in Central Asia, especially in its southern part. In the northern part of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, southern Russia), genetic studies have indicated population movements east and west since the Late Neolithic, leading to a gradient in the genetic origin of the western steppe. In southern Central Asia, where most of the ancient genomes date from the late Neolithic and Bronze Age, the inhabitants of the Bactria-Margiana archaeological complex have been shown to be closely related to the ancient populations of southern modern Iran, with some of their representatives showing an additional steppe origin. However, the links between the modern Iranian-speaking
population and the ancient inhabitants of the southern part of Central Asia remain unclear. Scholars raise a number of questions: ⦁ What are the genetic origins of modern Indo-Iranian speakers? ⦁ Can their origin be traced back to the Iron or Bronze Age? ⦁ Are there one or more distinct population histories in this linguistic population? ⦁ And what is the role of the Turkmen in this story? Paleogenetic studies have provided additional tools for finding answers to these questions. In the new work , the authors analyzed genome-wide data from 16 modern populations from Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Western Mongolia, and Southern Siberia, together with ancient and modern genomes.
Results Genetic similarities between modern and ancient Indo-Iranians In order to explore the relationship of modern Central Asians with diverse ancient and modern Eurasian populations, the authors projected 3102 ancient genomes onto 1915 modern ones in principal component analysis. By the way, I will dwell in detail on the graph of the analysis of the main components, because it reflects the general picture of the gene pool of the whole of Eurasia. This is difficult, but very important, please try to understand the schedule. At the same time, I draw your attention to the fact that in all works, these graphs differ only in scale and some details of the projection onto the plane. And the position of the populations on them is calculated very accurately, new ancient and modern samples are only added to them. At the same time, the latest works of paleogenetics are based on previous studies, reviews of which are also available on the channel, only new ones supplement, correct and refine their results. Which
indicates the high accuracy of modern methods. This is so, to the reliability of the data on the channel. But let's continue: On the principal component analysis graph, modern populations are divided into eastern and western according to the first main component, European and South Asian according to the second, and the third component distinguishes the Baikal populations from the East Asian cluster. Modern Indo-Iranians from Central Asia cluster together on the first three components, while Turkic-Mongolian representatives form a gradient from the Indo-Iranian cluster to ancient Baikal samples on the 3rd component, according to cultural clustering instead of geography. In the Indo-Iranian group, there is a substructure consisting of Yaghnobi (TJY) closely related to the western cluster, while Tajik populations (TJA, TJE, TAB) are drawn to the Baikal cluster, indicating some minor additional affinity to hunter-gatherers from East Asia or Baikal (BHG).
The ancient representatives of the steppe of the Bronze and Iron Ages, as well as the historical period, fall on a wedge stretching from European to East Asian groups. And the ancient inhabitants of the southern part of Central Asia (Neolithic, Bronze and Iron Ages) are located on a line stretching from the Iranian Neolithic farmers to modern Iranians and Yaghnobis. In general, the ancient and modern Indo-Iranian populations from Central Asia together form a lineage between the Neolithic Iranian agriculturalists and the Bronze Age central steppe cluster, with a clear shift towards a steppe origin between the Bronze and Iron Ages and a slight shift towards an East Asian origin between the Iron Age and the present. Moreover, this shift is more noticeable among the Tajiks than among the Yaghnobis. Admixture analysis, with the same set of data, confirmed in all modern Indo-Iranians the presence of a genetic component maximized in Iranian Neolithic cultivators (dark green; average for Yaghnobis: 37%; and for Tajiks 25%), another Indo-Iranian component (pale green ; average for Yaghnobis: 13%; and for Tajiks: 10%), is maximized in hunter-gatherers of Eastern Europe, as well as in Western and Scandinavian hunter-gatherers.
The third component (dark blue; average for Yaghnobis: 36%; for Tajiks: 29%) is not fully maximized in any of the analyzed populations, but is found in modern Europeans and Anatolian Neolithic farmers. And the fourth component, maximized in Baikal hunter-gatherers and largely present in all modern Turkic-Mongolian populations (red; 50% on average), is also present, but to a lesser extent, in modern Indo-Iranian populations, and its share in the Yagnobis significantly less than among Tajiks, namely 7% and 14% respectively. At the same time, Tajiks share about 4% of their ancestors with modern East Asians, this component, indicated in pink on the graph, is maximized in the Chinese, and is also present in all Turkic-Mongolian populations from Central Asia (average value of 10%), together with 8% of the component which is maximized in modern South Asian populations (orange). At the same time, both of these components are absent among the Yaghnobis. This analysis is also consistent with principal component analysis for ancient groups as well. The inhabitants of southern Central Asia of the Iron Age show a profile remarkably similar to that of the Yaghnobis without the contribution of hunters and gatherers of Baikal. Bronze Age Central Steppe pastoralists show a similar profile, except for a significant increase in Iranian ancestry, and Western Steppe pastoralists have a component most pronounced in Western European hunter-gatherers (beige WEHG), which is absent in modern Indo-Iranians.
Thus, modern Iranian-speaking populations are midway between the Bronze Age populations of the Central Steppe and southern Central Asia, similar to the Iron Age people of Turkmenistan, with limited contributions from East and South Asian groups. By the way, pay attention to when and how much a component associated with the Turks and Mongols appears. This is their marker is the East Asian component, this has been proven many times, in this work, the Baikal populations are used as such a marker. And not Paleolithic, as many confuse. These are not representatives of the Malta parking lot. And representatives of the
Shaman of the early Neolithic. That's a big difference! And the fact that some Central Asian populations later mixed with East Asians - the Turks, does not make all their ancestors Turks. Descendants yes, ancestors no. This is a substitution! By the way, in the comments they once wrote that the author of the channel, that is, me, does not like the Turks. Guys, what are dumplings to love or not to love? Or are we rooting for football teams here? But honestly, it's already boiling over.
By the way, the Turks have their own real history, why distort it? She is so interesting. The fact that they have now preserved some cultural traditions is only a plus for them. But why write and dream? It's like considering all the ancestors of those who have now switched to English - the British, but this is nonsense. Or how to consider Abram Petrovich Hannibal Russian, just because he is the great-grandfather of Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin. But it doesn't work that way. By the way, regarding the settlement of America and the similarity of languages, no one has provided reliable sources. It all comes down to this: I read it somewhere, I looked it up on the Internet, here's a video on YouTube... You guys are little kids, do you need to explain
what reliable sources are? Well, if you don't know, read it. Or which liked the one and reliable? As for languages, think about it. Are there any languages in the world that would not have a single similarity with other languages. By the way, attempts to explain gaps in knowledge with logic are normal. But often this is a road to nowhere. Here's a simple example: Try to explain why an apple turns dark on the cut? Some will say that this is oxidized iron, but this is complete nonsense. Try to read
about polyphenol oxidase and its interaction with polyphenols, for many it will be a surprise. By the way, ask this question to your friends and write in the comments what answer you get. I apologize for such a long digression, but sometimes it just boils. So let's jump straight to the results. Conclusions The new study provides insight into the history of the Indo-Iranians in southern Central Asia, using evidence to track population history up to the Iron Age.
As suggested by previous genetic studies, as well as confirmed by historical and archaeological evidence, Indo-Iranian speakers appeared in Central Asia long before Turkic and Mongolian speakers. Guys, it's a fact! If you disagree, show the scientific sources of data. By the way, those who want to dispute something, please provide links to scientific sources of information. Not on YouTube videos, not on articles in newspapers, but on scientific sources of information! By the way, if anyone does not know, then read what people have come up with so that there are fewer falsifications in science. What are peer-reviewed scientific journals, and so on. Links to YouTube videos are not accepted. The main event in the basis of the Indo-Iranian ancestry in the south of Central Asia occurred at the turn of the Bronze and Iron Ages, as a result of the mixing of local groups of the Bactrian-Margiana archaeological complex and the population genetically related to the Andronovo culture, possibly with the final stage of the Oksa civilization.
At the same time, the steppe group that mixed with the Bactirians did not have an East Asian origin, which is consistent with both archaeological and genetic data that people of East Asian origin began to appear in the Central Steppe only at the end of the Iron Age. I repeat once again - at the end of the Iron Age. This is for the dull ones, although if they look up to this point ... Since the nomads of the late Bronze and Iron Ages are genetically very heterogeneous, the authors believe that the source of the origin of the western steppes, found in the southern part of Central Asia of the Iron Age, may not have been determined yet. It is interesting to note that the flow of genes between the Steppe and southern Central Asia went in two directions. A recent study showed
that gene flow from people from Bactria and Margiana contributed to the genetic formation of the Scythians. The new findings, combined with previous studies, strongly support the hypothesis based on archaeological evidence that the civilizations of southern Central Asia, beginning with the Bactria-Margiana archaeological complex, and the cultures of the western steppe had a strong cultural connection. It is worth mentioning that in addition to this work, in another study late last year, the authors, using genomic data from the southern part of Uzbekistan from the Bronze Age to the Iron Age, report an increase in steppe-related admixture in the Iron Age compared to Bronze Age populations in the region of Bactria and Margiana. A source of steppe origin, has been identified as Late Bronze Age steppe populations that mixed with local populations associated with the earlier inhabitants of the Bactria-Margiana archaeological complex, predominant in this region. However, migration and mixing with steppe sources did not replace the pre-existing Iranian and Anatolian ancestry associated with farmers.
The populations of Iron Age Uzbekistan are modeled as a mixture of Iranian agriculturalists (31-39%), Anatolian agriculturalists (30-34%) and steppe representatives (15-17%), with the addition of a minor contribution from Western hunter-gatherers. The Iron Age populations of Uzbekistan also show little genetic relationship with South and East Asian populations, suggesting migrations. And in general, the population of Uzbekistan of the Iron Age was closer to modern Europeans than to modern Uzbeks. But here it is worth noting that this similarity is not due to descent from Europeans, but to common components in the gene pool, like Anatolian farmers and steppe nomads. But later in Uzbekistan there was a flow of genes from East
Asia and Siberia, which led to the formation of the modern gene pool in this region. However, in contrast to Uzbekistan, the results of work on the Indo-Iranian populations of Central Asia show a remarkable example of genetic continuity since the Iron Age, despite the very intensive migration of the population in this area since the Bronze Age. In addition, like previous works, this study does not show the impact of the Arab cultural expansion in Central Asia on the genetic diversity of Indo-Iranian speakers, despite the fact that this expansion led to a change in the Tajik language. In addition, no gene flow from Iran has been identified, despite Persian cultural expansion, which led to a linguistic transition from East Iranian to West Iranian among the Tajiks - while the Yaghnobis retained their language, belonging to the northeastern subgroup of the Eastern group of Iranian languages. At the same time, the Yaghnobis are characterized by genetic stability over time, which may be due to their long-term isolation due to the inaccessibility of the Yaghnob River valley. Available evidence suggests that the separation between
the Yaghnobis and Tajiks occurred at least 1,000 years ago, which explains the high genetic differentiation seen in Indo-Iranians in previous studies. This implies that the Yaghnobis could be a good example of the gene pool that was present in Central Asia before the migratory waves that led to the current genetic diversity, despite the strong drift that occurred. Although the number of East Asian ancestors due to mixing with modern Turkic-Mongolian groups remains low, even among the Tajiks, which is consistent with previous findings, in which scientists noted only a slight influence of the westward moving Huns and Mongols on the Indo-Iranian groups of Central Asia. The authors of the work found in the Yaghnobis, Tajiks and Turkmens a slight gene flow associated with the hunter-gatherers of Lake Baikal, about a thousand years ago, which indicates a recent wave of westward migration from the Altai after the Iron Age.
This recent wave may be related to the emergence of Turkic-Mongolian languages in Central Asia, as has been demonstrated in other works over the past 10 years. In addition, the data support genetic homogeneity among the Yaghnobis, Tajiks, and Turkmens despite their cultural and especially linguistic differences, albeit with some genetic differences resulting from different patterns of gene flow between Tajiks and Turkmens. It is noteworthy that in the new work, the authors witnessed a previously unknown event of admixture from South Asia among the Tajiks, despite evidence of such admixture among the Iranian Turkmens.
According to previous archaeological studies, it is known that multidirectional cultural exchange with South Asia took place as early as the Eneolithic period: in particular, from the Sialk culture and other Iranian cultures towards Balochistan or from the Goksyur culture in Turkmenistan to southern Afghanistan. In the opposite direction, from south to north, pottery of the Mundigak III type in Kandahar province finds parallels as far as Badakhshan in northeastern Afghanistan, while materials from Balochistan and shells used in necklaces and bracelets from the Arabian Sea are found at the Sarazm site in Tajikistan, which indicates trade over long distances. Interestingly, genetic affinity between southern Central Asian and South Asian groups has already been suggested for specimens from the Bactrian-Margiana archaeological complex and raises questions about the timing of this gene flow. The date of mixing with South Asian components, obtained by researchers, coincides with the transition from Eastern to Western Iranian among the Tajiks and is associated with the Persian expansion 1500 years ago. Finally, the case of the Turkmens is a prime example of how a population changes language and culture without significant genetic changes. Indeed, the Turkic-speaking peoples inhabiting the whole
of Eurasia are the result of several nomadic migrations that cover the territory from Siberia to Eastern Europe and the Middle East, through Central Asia and took place over a long period, from the 5th to the 16th century. Several previous studies have shown that in regions outside of Central Asia, Turkic-speaking peoples are genetically similar to their geographic neighbors with no clear genetic differences. And this indicates the replacement of the language in these regions, with Turkic ones, due to the dominance of the elites, and not the replacement of the population. Turkmen fit into this global model, but are an exception in their region. Because,
other Turkic-speaking populations of Central Asia, such as the Kyrgyz or Kazakhs, show a different genetic profile with a clear dominance of East Asian and Baikal components, which indicates a more significant admixture of nomads from Southern Siberia and Mongolia, which date back to about the 10th-14th centuries. And a small number of East Asian ancestors among the Turkmens was associated with an admixture dating from about the 15th century, that is, a little later than the first admixture in Central Asia, and may come from these Turkic-Mongolian groups. And the genetic proximity of the Turkmens to modern West Eurasian populations, noted in earlier studies, is due to a common steppe origin. In general, however, the case of the Turkmens is yet another example where language and genetics do not match, calling into question the idea of the spread of languages only through migrations. And in conclusion, I want to note that the
sponsorship function is finally available on the channel . I ask everyone who cares to support the channel. And as usual, I don’t say goodbye to this, good mood to you and until new releases. And do not forget about other ways to support.